Why Won't Charles Bukowski Eat Beef Tongue?

Aesthetic Expectations and Food Waste

Alex Williams | Pacific Lutheran University

Over the course of this class we have repeatedly discussed the ethical pitfalls of our modern food system, including environmental degradation, inhumanity to animals, and of course the immense amounts of waste that occur. Food waste was the primary focus of our talks this week, and as we worked our way through the issue and unpacked it further, we narrowed down it's causes. The two roots that we identified and articulated most were arbitrary aesthetic values and capitalism. Both of these problems are deeply systemic and we can see them frequently manifested in day to day life.

The preferred hierarchy of food disposal

Perhaps the most striking aspect of food waste is that, despite the fact that nearly 800 million people are affected by hunger worldwide, we continue to throw away around 1.3 billion tons of food worldwide- up to 40% of food in the United States alone. This would obviously be a valid and appropriate statistic if the food being disposed of was entirely useless, but as we learned in Anthony Bourdain's Wasted: The Story of Food Waste that simply isn't true; there are several other ways to utilize food that would otherwise be thrown away. In doing so we reduce deforestation, generate better quality animals for food and work towards solving the world hunger crisis. Unfortunately, for the aforementioned reasons, the food industry continues to impose arbitrary sell-by dates and prioritize "aesthetically pleasing" produce. This creates a feedback loop in which people develop prototypical expectations for food which reaffirms, in the cooperate eye, the value of throwing away “ugly” or "inedible" produce.

These descriptors place not only arbitrary aesthetic value on certain foods, but makes value judgements on entire cultures and lifestyles. The commentary on these issues can be found not only in the political sphere and documentaries, but in the realm of the arts too. Contemporary poet Charles Bukowski's 1969 piece, "Beef Tongue", details his own judgmental attitude- and intense disgust- towards his friends preparation of beef tongue for a meal. Despite being incredibly hungry, Bukowski can't stand the thought of consuming what he perceives to be an inedible portion of meat.

I hadn't eaten for a couple of days

and I had mentioned that several times

and I was up at this poet's place
where a tiny woman took care of him.
he was a big bearded ox with a brain twice as large as the
world, and we'd been up all night

When we take into perspective the fact that so many people in the world are suffering from hunger and starvation in the world, and particularly in America, these types of attitudes are reasonably disconcerting. To say that, even when starving, you wouldn't eat "that" is to indicate that you are above a certain type of consumption, and therefore above the people who do eat that item. The United States has a very developed food culture. It consists of a gauntlet of expectations- color, texture, smell, taste, etc.- all of which must be perfect in order for a food to be "good". As our guest speaker from the Emergency Food Network detailed, even the smallest defects and inconsistencies in food items can result in their rejection. This is what necessitates the first level of the Food Waste Pyramid. The unfortunate fact of the matter is that a majority of the food wasted worldwide is edible, just aesthetically flawed. We even talked about the ways in which groups like the USDA facilitate this waste by putting size restrictions on foods. Asparagus, for example, according to the USDA must be "not less than one half inch in diameter". Since only 10% of a lot is allowed to have this particular defect, the rest- no matter how close to the benchmark- is disposed of. Not surprisingly, the USDA controls large swaths of legal ground in the food industry. In A Place at the Table we learned that they grant 70% of farm subsidies to only 10% of farms. 

and the next thing I knew

he was coming out of the kitchen

saying, "Hey, Chinaski! LOOK!"

I couldn't see it clearly-

at first it looked like a yellow boot filled with water

then it looked like a fish without a head

and then it looked like an elephant's cock,

and then he brought it closer:

"BEEF TONGUE! BEEF TONGUE!"

Off the bat, Bukowski uses a slew of negative descriptors for the piece of meat. Despite his friends evident excitement, he expresses extreme distaste. In class we've talked about how you can tell as much about someone by looking at what they won't eat as what they will. It's a value statement, after all. Often times our less desirable produce goes to other countries or it goes to low income areas and food banks as Helen told us. We refuse to dignify these foods with our time, so we send it to those we believe are on par with this quality of food. It's a way of distinguishing classes of people- what they are permitted to eat. The act of controlling the consumption of others alone establishes a pattern of dominance. 

it was rape, 
they had gone deep into the creature's throat
and hacked it out, and there it was now:
just another reasonable and sensible atrocity
committed by intelligent men. 

I was not an intelligent man. I 

made it to the sink and began to

heave.
stupid, of course, stupid, it was only dead meat,

This is an important observation on Bukowski's part. Since we talked about eco feminism mid way through the class, animal ethics have been a big part of our considerations when we talk about how to build a sustainable and ethical food system. Bukowski categorizes the death of this animal as a violent act, and rebukes the societal justification of such actions as "sensible atrocities". We justify the slaughter of animals for meat, and even still we waste a substantial amount of it. The chart to the right details the amount of animal flesh that is lost at both the retail and consumer levels according to the USDA (which, as we learned with Dr. Emmerman, doesn't even have to report all it's data with regards to animal products). At the very least we could attempt to honor these animals by utilizing all of them, in a way that we know is possible. From the Cooked episodes that we watched in class to Wasted we see that there area a myriad of ways to prepare this supposedly undesirable food. Unfortunately, Bukowski turns from his budding eco feminist critique and passes it off as unnecessary squeamishness.

in that bubbling water without mouth or eye

or name, it was a huge tongue going around and around under that lid
becoming most delicious and flavored 
I asked him to please turn it off.

He even goes so far as to call the meat delicious and yet requests his host accommodate him by turning it off. This a piece of meat that is so often thrown out or passed down the aforementioned hierarchy to someone with a stronger stomach and more resourceful cooking skills. Bukowskis request for accommodation is indicative of trends in global food culture. When we went to the Asian Pacific Cultural Center, our host asked all of us to be more mindful of the way we treat other people with regards to their eating habits. Whether it's smell, taste, or appearance, as with Bukowski, there is no need to give commentary on someones food. It's unnecessary, unsolicited and rude. Were the whole world to subscribe to the terribly wasteful Western Diet we would surely see food waste go up exponentially and subsequently hunger. The reality is that we are the ones with the backwards eating habits. We're incredibly picky of which parts of animals and plants we'll eat, and it's only been in recent decades that the food industry has been more responsive to the ensuing issue of waste. Meanwhile we're a driving force behind deforestation, ocean acidification, desertification, and general environmental degradation because of our agricultural methods. 

I heard the boiling water and I smelled that tongue cooking,

thank Christ he hadn't invited me for

dinner. when I got home I thumbed through some

Renoir, Pissarro and Diaz

prints. then I ate a hard-boiled

egg.

If only the hungry people in the world had the option to simply eat something else. They don't, because we have decided that they aren't deserving of the same level of nourishment as the more affluent and financially stable. They eat what is given to them and adapt to be more inventive with their preparation. Bukowski feels lucky to have been deprived the chance of a meal with a friend, simply because of the entree. This aesthetic distaste along with government encouragement and the profit motive to move inventory is what contributes largely to the massive amounts of food waste that occurs. 

Lengua (beef tongue) is super delicious

This nonchalant commentary on personal food attitudes seems, at face value, harmless. "It's just a matter of taste", some may say. But really, it's a statement that one type of food or method of preparation is more important than another. When we deem things like insects, organs and invertebrates "disgusting", we cast that label onto those that, for one reason or another, subsist on that substance. This contributes even more to the cultural subjugation that is rampant enough as it is. We saw in Wasted that these values are entirely arbitrary as it is. Were Bukowski to have been served the tongue without having known what it was, he probably would have enjoyed it immensely (it's a fantastic cut).

How do we navigate a classist capitalist system to attain an equitable and sustainable agricultural system? Why are we stuck in these confines?

The term "taking the pill that makes you ill" has been thrown around a lot over the past few weeks. From Wonder Bread to genetically modified foods, it seems like so often we find issues with our food that were bred by the very capitalist attitude that seeks to right the wrong. In this case, for the preceding reasons, we see that industrial agricultural operations and governments worldwide are balking at the amount of food waste going into landfills and now trying to market innovative and amazing solutions. The key word there is market. The reality is that even grass roots movements and more equitable methods of solvency for this issue have to work within the confines of a capitalist system that will not be receptive to anything other than their own style of operation. This hampers their progress and limits their influence. 

Unfortunately, these norms are deeply entrenched to the point where there really is no viable option for solvency that doesn't necessitate cooperation with capitalism. If we changed that mindset, I'm sure we could see an overhaul of our intercultural relations and a stop in the commodification of food and the food preparation process, however that would take an extreme amount of revolutionary social change. With the looming environmental crisis, though, who knows? Maybe that will literally light a fire under the upper class and the world government to bring some sense of consciousness and urgency tot his issue.

Who knew a Facebook text meme would sum this issue
up so nicely

So aside from my preferred proletariat uprising, what are people doing to eliminate food waste and encourage equity? The success of programs like Cooked have cultural influence in that they demonstrate that waste-less cooking isn't inherently low-class (NOT that that should even be a distinction) or negative. Education on nose-to-tail farming has also been important. Working more strictly within the capitalist confines, as demonstrated in countries like South Korea, tax incentives to reduce waste can have wild amounts of success, with the country reducing their food waste by 30% in just a few years of running the program. 

So long as unprecedented amounts of people are going hungry in some of the most affluent countries in the world, food waste and the inefficiencies in the food industry will continue to be a pressing issue. This is not an exclusively political issue or a social issue or an economic issue. It's in the arts, it's in the humanities, it's in the government and on the streets. Understanding those different facets is an easy place to start when we consider how to dismantle this system in a way that stays true to the people that are suffering because of it. Continually pushing for open mindedness is, as per usual, incredibly important as well. Branch out, try some beef tongue, eat a cricket or a snail. The results may surprise you.

Todays capitalist critique was brought to you by Henry Charles Bukowski

Word count: 2137

Beef Tongue Recipe!